LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10   Report Post  
Old November 29th 04, 08:57 PM
Roy Lewallen
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I offer a third third response.

On p. 175, Chipman states:

"Equation (8.27) demonstrates explicitly that the shape of a standing
wave pattern representing |V(d)| as a function of d on a transmission
line is in no way affected by the quantities Vs, Zs and [rho]s at the
source."

And equation 8.29 on p. 176, the calculation of reflection coefficient,
contains no source-dependent terms. I'm sure that somewhere in the book,
the author derives SWR in terms of reflection coefficient.

These are the facts:

1. The SWR, positions of the standing waves, reflection coefficient seen
looking into the line, impedance seen looking into the line, and dB line
loss are independent of source impedance.
2. The actual amount of power delivered to a line for a given Thevenin
source voltage will, of course, depend on the source impedance, just as
it would if the source were directly connected to a load. Therefore, the
absolute amount of power dissipated in the load depends on source
impedance. The dB line loss, however, doesn't. Also, the length of time
the line requires to reach equilibrium after initially turning on the
source depends on the source impedance.

These can be found, explicitly stated and/or in easily interpreted
equation form, in a host of references.

I see nothing in the text Wes has kindly posted which contradicts these
facts, and I'm sure there's nothing elsewhere in the text that does.

I often have a hard time understanding Richard's postings, so it's
possible that he's not disagreeing with the statements I've made,
either. If so, I apologize for the misinterpretation.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Richard Clark wrote:

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:27:37 -0700, Wes Stewart
wrote:

I did it anyway. [g] Hope this covers it:
http://users.triconet.org/wesandlind...rdClarkRef.pdf



Hi Wes,

Thanx very much. I can see one of two results from this general
availability. The readership here can:
1. Avoid it in stunned shame (the embarrassment in coming of age);
2. Accept it as a remarkable revelation (because it's on the web).

I would hope for a third response from those who could argue what
follows from these first principles, but the lazier ones would
complain of my "attitude" and hobble back to their beauty contests on
their crutches. ;-)

To quote one of my favorite authors, Raymond Chandler, when in "The
Big Sleep" Doghouse Reilly is admonished about the same defect, he
avers "I don't mind if you don't like my manners. They're pretty bad.
I grieve over them during the long winter evenings."

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC



 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Current in antenna loading coils controversy - new measurement Yuri Blanarovich Antenna 69 December 5th 03 02:11 PM
Complex line Z0: A numerical example Roy Lewallen Antenna 11 September 13th 03 01:04 AM
A Subtle Detail of Reflection Coefficients (but important to know) Dr. Slick Antenna 199 September 12th 03 10:06 PM
Re-Normalizing the Smith Chart (Changing the SWR into the same load) Dr. Slick Antenna 98 August 30th 03 03:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017